Text Size

-

+

reset

POLITICO 44

That’s because in the two months since the last debate — a stiff, largely uneventful New Hampshire forum — few of the GOP hopefuls have done anything to shake up the low-key, largely civil primary race. Among the declared candidates, only Michele Bachmann is on the move, and her Iowa-centric surge has yet to put a scare into national front-runner Mitt Romney.

That could begin to change Thursday evening, as a pack of lagging hopefuls seeks to make up ground on the eve of the Ames Straw Poll by taking on Romney and Bachmann.

“This is that window where the candidates can rise to the occasion or crumble. We’ll look back on this in about five months and the field won’t look anything like it does now because some people will have risen to this moment,” said Republican strategist Alex Castellanos, who is unaligned in the 2012 race. “This is the beginning of the real campaign here.”

Each of the candidates will have a slightly different objective in the Iowa debate. For some — including Bachmann, Tim Pawlenty, Ron Paul, Herman Cain and Rick Santorum — the most immediate goal will be firing up their core supporters for the Saturday straw poll. Bachmann has the additional burden of meeting high expectations set by her strong performance in New Hampshire.

Two other candidates who are not competing in the Ames ballot — Jon Huntsman and Newt Gingrich — will be seeking to prove they’re relevant to the race, despite languishing in the single digits in national and early-state polling.

Romney, meanwhile, will likely attempt to keep his focus on President Barack Obama and hammer away at the economic message that has made him the early favorite.

If any of the other candidates can knock him off balance — or even bait him into a real confrontation — it would be the first time in the race anyone has truly laid a glove on the former Massachusetts governor.

“I don’t see how it’s not going to be tougher for Romney [in this debate], as the prospects for beating Obama have grown to the point where several of the candidates can realistically envision winning next year,” said conservative strategist Keith Appell. “There are deep reservations about Romney because he didn’t govern as a conservative and he has changed positions on a variety of key issues, so why trust him now?”

Going after Romney may be easier said than done, however. Because he’s not competing in the Iowa straw poll, Romney is not necessarily an ideal target for candidates such as Bachmann and Pawlenty, who are.

For candidates who have more riding on Iowa, the temptation to attack in-state rivals instead of Romney may be overwhelming.

“My strategic goal, if I’m Pawlenty, Paul or Bachmann, is to rev up my troops for Saturday and continue to draw a distinction between myself and the other two,” said Republican pollster Tony Fabrizio, adding Santorum’s name into the mix of Iowa combatants.

Questions concerning tonight’s Iowa Republican debate include: Will generic Republican moaning and lying about President Obama be complemented with Republicans attacking Republicans? (Surely, yet college students taking a drink in the drinking game every time a lie about Obama is voiced by a Republican will be drunk before twenty minutes into the debate.) Will Paul get through the debate without revealing his libertarian ideas lead to general anarchy? (Yes, but he’ll touch on some off-putting kooky idea that will remind most voters why they don’t trust him.) Will Bachmann be attacked for advocating the elimination the EPA? (Jon, Tim and Mitt should attack her but Republicans don’t want to alienate the large body of crazies within their base.) Which Republican will receive the most Republican fire? (My guess is Romney, followed by Bachmann and Pawlenty.) Will Republican candidates be asked how they feel about new Republican terrorist tactics used on Capitol Hill? (Never: this is a Republican debate and therefore steeped in denial.) Will we voters learn anything useful and new about any of the candidates? (I believe so, which is why I will be watching.)

“There are deep reservations about Romney because he didn’t govern as a conservative and he has changed positions on a variety of key issues, so why trust him now?”

lol.........didn't govern as a conservative........please..............balancing a Blue State budget all four years without tax increases and leaving the State with a $2 billion dollar rainy day fund IS govening as a Conservative........

Unemployment peaked at 6% two months after Romney was sworn in and when he left office unemployment in Massachusetts was at 4.7 %.....................the 47th in job growth that the DNC and MSM wolfpack like to use isn't the correct indicator..

Also while govenor of Massachusetts Romney got their State Bond Rating increased not decreased like Obama ...........

The real question is why was Romney so successful as a governor of a deep blue state with a Democrat Legislature that was 85% Democrat..........

That's story that American deserve to read about as they try to determine which candidate is the best one to lead America forward in 2012............

This.............he said .............then I said.....................then they said...............stuff doesn't really do that.

Also while govenor of Massachusetts Romney got their State Bond Rating increased not decreased like Obama ...........

Did you read how he got it increased? By praising and selling the rating agency on the tax raises right before he was elected that would create his rainy-day fund. Romney also advanced his closing tax loopholes on corporations and changing their rates. He also raised cigarette taxes 75 cents per pack. He provided the rating agency with a balanced approach yet criticized Obama's balanced approach. Indeed, S&P basically said if we had achieved the big, balanced deal our president pushed for, we would not have been downgraded. This is entirely a Republican downgrade.

Beat up on Obama. What a novel concept! It would be novel to see any of these people actually propose solutions to the nation's problems. They all attack Obama seven days a week anyway and after a while, it all becomes white noise. Solutions, not sound bites, will attract attention from a currently unimpressed electorate.

The real question is why was Romney so successful as a governor of a deep blue state with a Democrat Legislature that was 85% Democrat..........

Could it be because Romney is more progressive than most pretend conservatives? After all, he does believe that the government knows better how to take "care" of the masses than the people themselves. I'm sure that Romney has MUCH more in common with John Kerry than he has with Barry Goldwater or Ronald Reagan.

Did you read how he got it increased? By praising and selling the rating agency on the tax raises right before he was elected

lol..........poor Roameo.......... use to just put in one just one post a day..........now she's trying to prop up her hero......

Olde DNC BEN SMITH who wrote that very misleading artlicle "tried" to give the impression that Romney raised taxes in 2002.........except for one tiny FACT...........Romney didn't become governor until 2003..............lol !

Roameo.......there is a concept that you and your fellow liberal/progressive pals need to start warming up to and that is Obama is toast.............. no mass.......

So what will be new if they attack Obama! They attack Obama because they have nothing but talking points to discuss. Have any of these yo yo's proposed anything that is not based on the Republican talking points: Balanced budget amendment, spending cuts, no taxes increase. " I haven't seen anyting and I do watch these things pretty closely.